About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN 8
CNNW 2
CSPAN2 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 17
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17
'll ask about the faa graham says he disagrees with the obama administration's decision not to prosecute the suspect as an enemy combat it. >> i understand we will have a moment of silence for the victims in boston. that is appropriate, and the president is right to lead that effort. quickly, to the families who have lost loved ones, to those breaks as a nation. to the people of boston, you make us proud by the courage you have shown. to the law enforcement officials and intelligence community, god bless you for your hard work and your bravery. iat brings me here today is have been informed that the obama administration has indicated this suspect in boston will not be treated as an enemy combatant. i strongly disagree with the obama administration's decision to rule out the combatant status for the suspect at this time. i believe such a decision is premature. it is impossible for us to gather the evidence in just a few days to determine whether or not this individual should be held for questioning under the law of war. the decision by the administration to try this individual in federal
the policy of the united states since 9/11, including the bush administration, and the obama administration, for terror suspects apprehended within the united states to be treated in the federal system. there are two brief exceptions to that under the bush administration, even though two exceptions were treated in the civilian system. >> let me jump in. because senator graham was saying on fox just last night, or today, i'm fine with him getting tried in federal court. this is just about the initial designation. >> right. it's very difficult to actually designate somebody under the laws of war as an enemy combatant and not give them the rights and then try to drop them into the civilian system. you set yourself up when you do that. >> no -- >> let m point, jay. you set yourself up for all kinds of extensive challenges. there isn't a problem here. what you have i think is an enormous amount of public support right now for the job that law enforcement has done. and for senators who are not immediately involved in this thing, and many whom aren't even lawyers or been inside a court of law for
there are serious issues regarding interrogation. president obama sent a signal of the administration's intentions last night. >> it's important that we do this right. that's why we have investigations. that's why we relentlessly gather the facts. that's why we have courts. >> meanwhile, his family is condemning and praising the brothers. his mother, in russia, claims they were set up and controlled by the f.b.i. >> i am really sure, like 100% sure that this is a set-up. my two sons are really innocent and i know that my -- neither of them never, never have talked about whatever they're saying about now. >> their uncle in maryland blamed religious extremism. >> religious extremism, whoever was able to brainwash them, a friend of mine, he started being his father. he called me confused. his uncle who always been there. i think -- >> police say after an exchange of gun fire, dzhokhar was captured hiding under a tarp in a boat. thermal images helped police locate the suspect. [ cheers and applause ] the arrest sparked spontaneous appreciation on the streets. >> usa! >> an emotional ceremony of relief
between the obama administration and some of the republican -- sorry about this and what that means is the obama administration has said the criminal justice system can make this work, the criminal can handle national security risks like this person, terrorists have been prosecuted, moussaoui. this administration is committed to using the american courts there are some critics, like senator mccain, like senator graham, who say that's too big a risk, that we have too many protection, we have too many abilities on the part of these defendants not to answer questions that put all of us at risk but i don't think there's any chance the obama administration is going to change its mind and use something other than the criminal justice system for this case. >> because a lot of people are raising questions, they had apparently some explosive devices, some weapons, rifles, hand grenades, stuff that's pretty expensive. where did they get this material? where did the money come from that helped them purchase this material? that's why some of these republican senators, lawmakers, are asking for
. i hope the obama administration will allow us that option that exists in our law. they have a very bad track record here. >> reporter: fox news is told investigators are probing a potential link to a islamist group as first reported on fox over the weekend. they were responsible for the attack on moscow airport. in response the group issued a statement saying their disagreement is with russia. they did not deny knowing the brothers. also according to one source who has reviewed that, they were undercut in their claims trying to deny any connection because they pointed the finger as russia as being responsible for these bombings which of course there is no evidence to support that, jon. jon: catherine herridge, lots of tangled leads to unravel here. catherine, thank you. >> reporter: you're welcome. jenna: for more on this now we'll bring in our next guest, chris voss, retired fbi special agent and hostage negotiator and manager of insight security. we talked you to last few times in. great to have you back on the program. >> thank you, jenna. jenna: catherine is reporting on there
may be able to do so. when the obama administration going to that it was use the public safety exception, might be able you to do that but recognize that it .s limited and narrow so, now i think that might have been invoked. we don't know. that is one thing we don't actually currently know now. how this has proceeded. what is important here is that counsel and has has gone before a judge. look to the system to ork, which means we expect prosecutors to proceed fairly defensee their case and lawyers to zealously perform their duty. facts look to see what they find and architects they make. host: how different is the safety exception that can be invoked in the first phase after detention of a suspect, that different from looking at military or enemy status?t guest: the main difference the ublic safety exception is very narrow and limited in time. how not exactly clear much. i'm not sure if it was used by the obama administration, but if there was not enough time for a thorough interrogation of want from ou would somebody involved in an act of terrorism to know everything you nee
-existing conditions are being told basically by the obama administration, sorry, we didn't plan for you. mr. gardner: and i understand the money republicans would propose to spend to address this -- mr. wrung: and i understand the money the republicans would spend on this issue, the obama administration wants to spend on advertising, advertising the exchanges, dvertising how the obamacare will work. >> this is the helping sick americans act. tomorrow we're going to defund the preventive care act, the slush fund in the affordable care act that has been going for everything from paths and bike paths and advertising campaigns and spaying and neutering dogs, instead we're going to move that money, defund it, pay down about $8 billion on the deficit and we're going to move money into these high-risk pools that are run by the states that are going to take care of sick americans. mrs. roby: and we look forward to that debate in the next two days. we are closing in on the end of our hour, we are just joined by mr. griffin, the gentleman from arkansas and as you know, we are talking about tonight, this is ht
, or even any more likely to be suspicious as bad people. by the way, the bad guys, the obama administration has dramatically increased deportations as you know of the real criminals who we tend to be able to find and deport when necessary. >> mr. walsh? >> jonathan, these two guys, jonathan, these two guys weren't just losers. they were part of radical islam. they were radicalized. >> that's right. >> this is a threat we've known has existed for a number of years. >> it has nothing to do with the immigration bill. it's irrelevant. it's not being rushed through as you said. the bill has been pending for white a whi quite a while. >> jonathan, it's sophisticated mindsets like yours that get americans killed because you don't recognize we're at war. >> joe, i think i can call you joe now since you're not in congress anymore. you know, that's kind of -- that's the kind of level of debate saying it's people like you who cause us to be hit by terrorists. that's what lowers the whole tenner of the conversation. makes it very hard to have reasonable, good policy-making. the emotion you apply to the
brings me here today is i have been informed that the obama administration has indicated this suspect in boston will not be treated as an enemy combatants. i strongly disagree with the obama administration's decision to roll out and in the combat the status for the suspect at this time. i believe such a decision is premature. it is impossible for us to gather the evidence in just a few days to determine whether or not this individual should be held for questioning under the law of war. the decision by the administration to try this individual in federal court is a sound decision. it is the right decision. military commission trials are not available in cases like this. i wrote the 2009 military commission act. i have been the judge advocate for over 30 years, along with the help of many colleagues. we created a system for foreign terrorists. we purposely excluded american citizens. i have all the confidence in the world in article 3 courts at the federal level. they do a terrific job. i have confidence in our military commissions system. the decision by the administration not to proce
their rights being read, then law enforcement may be able to do so. and when the obama administration announced it was going to use the public safety exception we said, well, you might be able to do that but recognize that it is limited and narrow. and, so now, i think that might have been invobed. we don't know. that is one of the things that we don't actually currently know now. how this has proceeded. and i think what's important here is not the defendant has counsel and has gone before a judge and so we look to the system to work, which means we expect prosecutors to proceed fairly and prove their case and defense lawyers to zealously perform their duty and we'll look to see what facts they find and what arguments they make going forward. >> host: cliff may, how different is the public safety exception that can be invoked in that first phase after a detention of a suspect? how is that different than looking at military or enemy combatant status? >> guest: the main difference would be as hina has correctly said the public safety exception is very narrow and limited in time. it is not exactly
the obama administration will allow us that and they have a bad track record. >> and this is not the course the administration will take. they will take reading him his rights after national security exception has run out and prosecuting him in a federal court as well. >> molly: thank you. >> megyn: more breaking news. news reporting that federal charges have now been filed against the surviving suspect. though they are reportedly being filed under seal. that means we don't get to see them. they will have to let it's know what the charges are but perhaps not all the supporting information. in a case of this magnitude there is no way they are going to keep the charges private and not public. in other words, what exactly has he been charged with? a terrorist act, using weapons of mass destruction? these were all on the potential list of charges. so we'll try to get more on what they plan to release to the general public in terms of what they say this man on your screen is actually guilty of according to our federal prosecutors. also, new reaction from the white house about the bombing investi
forces? we are giving them, most recently, the obama' administration they would give them 120 $3 million. the opposition clearly that they wanted far more than that. yet we are giving them armor and stuff like that. how can we defeat them when we are supplying them? at the same time, we have some issues like benghazi and the helicopter that had the hard crash landing in south korea this week and nobody has covered that at all. west, texas connected to the bombing in boston? and how much fertilizer was taken away before the explosion occurred? is anybody have any control over that? you may come i just don't see how we can defeat al qaeda and terrorism, homegrown or foreign- born, if we continue to put with free welfare without giving them any drug test or saying you have 30 days to 90 days to get off of welfare and get a job. we just need to bring back our moral values and ethics and start holding our politicians to to make them stand up there and do what they said they do, and not get away with fast and furious. host of issues,, some directly related and some not. yes: it is not uncommon
balance that? >> i think the obama administration has done a great job so far in this case in striking that balance. i think they were right to invoke the public safety exception to miranda, which says, hey, if you've got a guy who is a dangerous terrorist, where there may still be attacks that are imminent, where he may have co-conspirators, there may be another bomb out there, you don't have to immediately read the miranda warnings. you can do what any sensible person would do and any sensible police officer would do, first, talk to the guy and make sure there is no other imminent threat. and then i think after they did that initial questioning, they also did the right thing to move him to the civilian criminal justice system. you know, senator graham and others have suggested, oh, no, they should have held him as an enemy combatant, should have held him under the laws of war, i think the experience in the jose padilla case and other cases shows that trying one of these new categories leads to years of legal confusion. >> jenny, let me jump in. just to both of you and we'll wrap this
straight ahead. the obama administration making the flying public feel the pain of the scare-quester. is the president hoping the anger will be directed by the flying public at republicans? stu varney will join in on ♪ [ man ] excuse me miss. [ gasps ] this fiber one 90 calorie brownie has all the deliciousness you desire. the brownie of your dreams is now deliciously real. over our secure network, verizon innovators are building a world of medical treatment data in the cloud. so doctors can make a more informed diagnosis from anywhere, in seconds rather than months. because the world's biggest challenges deserve even bigger solutions. powerful answers. verizon. ♪ right. but the most important feature of all is... the capital one purchase eraser. i can redeem the double miles i earned with my venture card to erase recent travel purchases. d with a few clicks, this mission never happened. uh, what's this button do? [ electricity zaps ] ♪ you requested backup? yes. yes i did. what's in your wallet? >>gretchen: if you're just waking up, 24 minutes after the top of the hour
these agencies, not the united states congress. under the obama administration, immigration agents can no longer arrest those who violate u.s. immigration law. immigration agents cannot arrest an individual for entering the u.s. illegally. we cannot arrest someone who over stays a visa. immigration agents are prohibited from enforcing laws regarding fraudulent documents and a dandy that by illegal aliens. agents are forced to apply the dream act, not to children in schools, but to adult inmates in jails. mmiething criminals back in nation, criminals who have insulted our officers, and who prey on children. at the same time, i.c.e. officers are punished and threatened by dhs and i.c.e. leadership, threatened with the loss of their jobs simply because they attempt to enforce the nation's immigration laws and provide for public safety. chosen togang 8 has ignore law enforcement officers, have a question i would like to ask them publicly. schumer, dickhuck durbin, john mccain, patrick leahy, lindsey graham, roark menendez, jeff blake, michael bennett's cut as united states senators, the representati
the metrics that this and the future administration will use to make sure that the border is truly secure. congress passed a law in 2007 requiring that the 100% of the e 0%operationally controlled." president obama and secretary napolitano abandoned that metric. the bill before us weakens that law by only requiring the southern border to be 90% effectively secured. in some sectors. only the so-lled high risk sectors. what about the other six? before green cards are allocated to those here illegally, the secretary only has to certify that the security plans and fencing's are "substantially deployed, operational, and completed." if the secretary does not do her job and a commission is created to provide recommendations, this is just a loophole that allows the secretary to neglect doing the job. another area of interest for me is employment verification measures. as i said before so many times, i was here in 1986 when we for the first time made it illegal for employers to hire undocumented individuals. i have been a champion for the e-verify system a staple in every workplace. it is an impor
very much. something not too bad year. you are looking at administration that has two former prime ministers and three former party presidents. you must be envious because you cannot do anything like that in your present system. clinton as the vice- presidentf obama. ll start off by touching my view is something is wrong when you say the u.s. is end andn the giving japan is always on the receiving end. must stand tall as an equal and responsible allied to the u.s. hard as ase must walk guardian of international goods, peace, prosperity, and democracy. thatas my grandfather's aspiration. -- japan'scurity security treaty, 1951 in san day,isco he wrote that one japan would work with the u.s. to maintainpartner the national order. 62 years later, that still holds. -- itmy belief hobbs that is my belief that japan has a noble responsibility to bring happiness and democracy in the world. that is why, ladies and gentlemen, japan must regain its economic power. that is why we are working hard to turn around our economy. make no mistake, we are pushing it not only for the sake of economic g
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17